CUSTODY LAW Pa. judges wrestle with right to relocate

They weigh one parent's career against the other's parent-child relationship.
PITTSBURGH (AP) -- More children are moving with their parents at a young age and nowhere is that more true than with children whose parents divorce.
Relocations prompted by divorce have created a dilemma for judges in Pennsylvania and elsewhere who must decide what is in the best interest of the child, while at the same time balancing the parental rights of both parties, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported Sunday.
A quarter of all children moved at least once before they turned 4 years old during the late 1990s, according to census figures.
After a divorce, 75 percent of custodial parents move within four years.
Many judges believe that relocation rules in Pennsylvania are too lax, allowing custodial parents to leave with children without ample consideration of a child's bond to the other parent.
"The state's current relocation standards do need to be revisited," said Eugene Scanlon, the presiding judge of the Allegheny County Common Pleas Court, family division. "A parent is being left behind, and life for those children and their relationship with that parent will never be the same."
Legislation
The state Senate is expected to consider legislation in the fall that could make it more difficult for custodial parents to relocate.
Legal experts are looking to California, where the state Supreme Court earlier this year agreed to hear a case in which a mother was repeatedly denied the right to move with her children, first to attend law school and then to join her new husband in another state.
The hurdles that divorced parents must jump are already too high, said Carol Bruch, a law professor at the University of California at Davis.
"We do allow couples to separate, and for a judge to try to recreate a situation that doesn't exist anymore is impossible," she said. "No one says that any of these doctrines substitute for a happy, intact family, but very often judges must pick between the lesser of two evils."
Pennsylvania differs from California in that custodial parents do not have to show that a move would be beneficial.
The burden falls on the other parent, who must prove that a move would be detrimental.
Reasons to move
The decision to move is not always career related and has more to do with getting closer to family that can provide support, making a judge's decision even more murky.
Judges say it is rarely a clear case of one side being in the right and the other in the wrong.
"Most of the time, you've got two decent parents who love their children and no matter what you do, someone is going to end up unhappy," said Allegheny Common Pleas Court Judge Kathleen Mulligan. "Either the custodial parent isn't going to be allowed to move, or the noncustodial parent is going to be left behind."
Attorneys also say the state law must be revisited, if nothing else than to let them know what to expect when they enter the courtroom.
"We've got judges dodging and weaving and avoiding the issue any way they can," said Joanne Ross, a divorce lawyer and author of a reference guide that tracks divorce cases. "It's almost tantamount to jury nullification."